fishmike wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

fishmike wrote:

BigRedDog wrote:

fishmike wrote:I love our fans... Jules gets 31/13/7 on 19 FGAs and plays 40 plus minutes, dude played so hard and misses one ISO at the end of the game and its

this offense is trash
I cant believe this coach player
I know he "played well" but I would still trade him
despite the math Randle somehow almost kinda phuked us

Good stuff... anyone listen to the postgame?

Nahhhh...... I know more than that idiot Thibs only playing vets and cant run an offense...

C'mon it was more than just " one iso" at the end. The last 3 minutes was dump it to Randle and watch. Randle doesnt have the offensive game to dump it to him 20 feet and and create for himself. Caruso a guard was defending him on prior plays him and Randle was taking fade a ways. Really? Brunson needs the ball, have these guys move and create shots. Do I know more than Thibs? of course not, but I do know that was one ugly azz last sequence. Also again why is Randle taking technical foul shots when IQ or Brunson is in the game? Doesnt make sense. Selfish MF

this is a waste of time. Sorry you didnt enjoy the win or the great season Randle's having. He's playing great and has been nothing but a great teammate and you missed it all cause he killed your cat. Smoke something and sit back and let go... dude's prolly gonna be here for a while, and that's OK cause he's good player on a good contract.

Literally every beef you could have about Randle he's improved on this year. This is the definition of being a hater. Good work, you the poster boy now. Sorry bud

How about we say he's chaotic neutral and leave it at that.

you just hate his ugly face. He may not be pretty but he aint THAT ugly

His jump passes are ugly and defensive/offensive reads can get damn right disgusting. But ugly face... That's pretty mean Fish. And subjective. It's not like he's Darth Vader without the helmet or Kevin Knox. Man... I didn't think you were this judgemental. I'm sure his wife and groupies think he's a handsome man and he does very well for himself.

BigRedDog wrote:Thibs said he was happy with Randles shot??? hopefully this is just for public sake and in the future they change how it goes down. The ball should have been in Brunsons hand. One of the ugliest shot sequence I have ever seen.
"Tom Thibodeau didn’t regret the final shot of regulation. In fact, he was happy with the shot despite Julius Randle’s baseline fadeaway failing to hit iron."

Here is an odd take from a not Randle-lover lol: I thought both the Randle post ups and last regulation shot were OK from a tactical perspective; they were definitely ugly to fail from an execution perspective. Knicks do only have 1 better offensive option in Brunson and he was banged up and every defender the Bulls could through at him was a fairly big guy, and Caruso was guarding him at 6'5" and he is a very good defender, last 3point ice skating routine aside.

You switch, switch and suddenly Randle is at top of key with Caruso on him at an advantage. Chicago NEEDS to double - as they did constantly - and Jules needs to make the right reads. I don't know if he really did that in the last minutes of regulation but he is in his spot.

The last shot? His fav side is cleared out and he got an open look. Fadeaway not the best type of shot you want but he got it.

Randle makes that fadeaway and everyone is a genius.

Last but not least: Coaches and teams NEED to put their best players in these situations. It is a win or tie (or sometimes lose) situation, and if you only go to Brunson EVERY game that is close - and there have been more than 2 games recently where Brunson failed at his last minute shots too - then you are doing a disservice to your team long term.

The team can't NOT give the ball to Brunson, RJ, Randle for those types of possessions, especially when they are doing well offensively, and Randle was. Those guys NEED to be in those situations and fail a lot to be able to get better and then not fail when it really counts - like play-in games or hopefully playoff games.

Knixkik wrote:

martin wrote:

MS wrote:Team is solid.

Problem is we signed Noel, Fournier Burks, Rose, Kemba traded a First for Cam, then traded a first to unload a contract and now have everyone of those player out of the rotation and are short two first rounders. That is scary on one offseason.

Happy we are playing well, but front office has some explaining to do

Problem is more that you can't get over the fact that teams do cycle contracts and players and picks, it's literally the nature of the beast. Go check out how many bad contracts are on a team like Miami right now. Or how GS used the #2 pick on a high level GLeague talent. Or how Brooklyn manages their super stars. Or how OKC traded Harden just before he exploded and let Durant walk. Or how the Celtics let Al Horford walk AND traded away Desomnd Bane just to get out of a 1 year $5M Enes Freedom Kanter. And what the ****ery is the Lakers Westbrook trade? You think SAS handled Primo well?

I could go on all day for pretty much all teams.

Knicks mistakes are so bad they are able to trade them away using 2nd round picks? Let that settle in for you. You don't want the Knicks taking calculated risks like the Cam trade? The opposite it even worse IMHO.

There has got to be some better barometer than just what you are staying.

It's silly talk after that.

Wow this really puts it into perspective. Thank you for that. Knicks cap management has been far from perfect but this is the nature of the beast. The front office is doing what they should be doing.

Knicks used second round picks to get rid of Burks, Noel - a combined $19M in salary for a 2023 pick, 2026 pick. Danny freakin' Ainge traded what turned out to be Desmond Bane to move $5M of an Enes Kanter trade.

How them apples taste?

Knicks traded what turned out to be the #13 pick Duren, 4 seconds and got back 3 other first round picks BACK for Kemba. That trade sequence still boggles my mind.

fishmike wrote:

BigRedDog wrote:

fishmike wrote:I love our fans... Jules gets 31/13/7 on 19 FGAs and plays 40 plus minutes, dude played so hard and misses one ISO at the end of the game and its

this offense is trash
I cant believe this coach player
I know he "played well" but I would still trade him
despite the math Randle somehow almost kinda phuked us

Good stuff... anyone listen to the postgame?

Nahhhh...... I know more than that idiot Thibs only playing vets and cant run an offense...

C'mon it was more than just " one iso" at the end. The last 3 minutes was dump it to Randle and watch. Randle doesnt have the offensive game to dump it to him 20 feet and and create for himself. Caruso a guard was defending him on prior plays him and Randle was taking fade a ways. Really? Brunson needs the ball, have these guys move and create shots. Do I know more than Thibs? of course not, but I do know that was one ugly azz last sequence. Also again why is Randle taking technical foul shots when IQ or Brunson is in the game? Doesnt make sense. Selfish MF

this is a waste of time. Sorry you didnt enjoy the win or the great season Randle's having. He's playing great and has been nothing but a great teammate and you missed it all cause he killed your cat. Smoke something and sit back and let go... dude's prolly gonna be here for a while, and that's OK cause he's good player on a good contract.

Literally every beef you could have about Randle he's improved on this year. This is the definition of being a hater. Good work, you the poster boy now. Sorry bud

Maybe I hate Randle or at least his game but I'm not a "hater" sorry bro. Yes he has improved ( still room for improvement eg when he "jogs" back on defense, lackluster effort on defense etc) but he is a 2nd or 3rd option on offense at best.

martin wrote:

BigRedDog wrote:Thibs said he was happy with Randles shot??? hopefully this is just for public sake and in the future they change how it goes down. The ball should have been in Brunsons hand. One of the ugliest shot sequence I have ever seen.
"Tom Thibodeau didn’t regret the final shot of regulation. In fact, he was happy with the shot despite Julius Randle’s baseline fadeaway failing to hit iron."

Here is an odd take from a not Randle-lover lol: I thought both the Randle post ups and last regulation shot were OK from a tactical perspective; they were definitely ugly to fail from an execution perspective. Knicks do only have 1 better offensive option in Brunson and he was banged up and every defender the Bulls could through at him was a fairly big guy, and Caruso was guarding him at 6'5" and he is a very good defender, last 3point ice skating routine aside.

You switch, switch and suddenly Randle is at top of key with Caruso on him at an advantage. Chicago NEEDS to double - as they did constantly - and Jules needs to make the right reads. I don't know if he really did that in the last minutes of regulation but he is in his spot.

The last shot? His fav side is cleared out and he got an open look. Fadeaway not the best type of shot you want but he got it.

Randle makes that fadeaway and everyone is a genius.

Last but not least: Coaches and teams NEED to put their best players in these situations. It is a win or tie (or sometimes lose) situation, and if you only go to Brunson EVERY game that is close - and there have been more than 2 games recently where Brunson failed at his last minute shots too - then you are doing a disservice to your team long term.

The team can't NOT give the ball to Brunson, RJ, Randle for those types of possessions, especially when they are doing well offensively, and Randle was. Those guys NEED to be in those situations and fail a lot to be able to get better and then not fail when it really counts - like play-in games or hopefully playoff games.

This is a good take. Most of which I agree with. Although I feel we should have mixed in some JB taking it to the hole as it was working at the end of the 4th and Iso Randle seemed excessive. But you made several good points regarding last shot and JB getting the chance and failing recently. I would have liked to see Randle take it strong to the hoop to draw a foul or pass it to MR but he had Williams on him and they were not exactly calling touch fouls in his favor down the stretch. Do think giving it to Randle at the foul line is a good play down the stretch. Not so much because he can score every time but rather that IF he recognizes and reacts to double/triple teams well/early, it creates opportunities for others. As it did clumsily at the end. Or by giving MR and Hart a chance at a offensive rebound. We had 15. Another thing not taken into account, by fans, when complaining about a failed strategy, is the good play by the opposing player. Caruso played several possessions extremely well. Got to give him credit for making the strategy fail. But again, Randle needs to improve his reads and timing on double teams.

blkexec wrote:

BigRedDog wrote:Thibs said he was happy with Randles shot??? hopefully this is just for public sake and in the future they change how it goes down. The ball should have been in Brunsons hand. One of the ugliest shot sequence I have ever seen.
"Tom Thibodeau didn’t regret the final shot of regulation. In fact, he was happy with the shot despite Julius Randle’s baseline fadeaway failing to hit iron."

This is why I starting saying thibs doesn’t hold Randle accountable. He uses pillow talk and gives a politically correct response with the intention to not throw Randle under the bus. This is an example of my original thought.

Now I’m seeing another side of thibs I didn’t know existed. Of course that was a bad play, but in the same breath it’s a shot he’s made several times. And even when he got those, I still felt like it was a bad shot. But he makes those shots so I can’t argue that.

But thibs is learning to use pillow talk by saying he’s ok with Randles shot. Same when thibs said the team is to blame for Randles ejection. Seems like he’s intentionally showing Randle that he’s wanted, he’s loved and the team needs him. So I’m retiring my comment on holding Randle accountable. I see now thibs is using the media at times to send a message to Randle and the team. Regardless if I agree or not. But I understand now.

I’m sure thibs and coaching staff are looking at that play with Randle. But we as fans will not be included in those talks or insight. Hopefully the next time we see some improvements in crunch time. Agree that JB should’ve had the ball in his hands. But JB wasn’t 100% so he gets a pass on that, especially how JB played in OT.

Can’t say enough about this team. Solid game. If we had lost though, there would’ve been a lot of trade Randle threads. Glad we won.

In this situation, what does holding Randle accountable look like? What actions are Thibs taking?

martin wrote:

blkexec wrote:

BigRedDog wrote:Thibs said he was happy with Randles shot??? hopefully this is just for public sake and in the future they change how it goes down. The ball should have been in Brunsons hand. One of the ugliest shot sequence I have ever seen.
"Tom Thibodeau didn’t regret the final shot of regulation. In fact, he was happy with the shot despite Julius Randle’s baseline fadeaway failing to hit iron."

This is why I starting saying thibs doesn’t hold Randle accountable. He uses pillow talk and gives a politically correct response with the intention to not throw Randle under the bus. This is an example of my original thought.

Now I’m seeing another side of thibs I didn’t know existed. Of course that was a bad play, but in the same breath it’s a shot he’s made several times. And even when he got those, I still felt like it was a bad shot. But he makes those shots so I can’t argue that.

But thibs is learning to use pillow talk by saying he’s ok with Randles shot. Same when thibs said the team is to blame for Randles ejection. Seems like he’s intentionally showing Randle that he’s wanted, he’s loved and the team needs him. So I’m retiring my comment on holding Randle accountable. I see now thibs is using the media at times to send a message to Randle and the team. Regardless if I agree or not. But I understand now.

I’m sure thibs and coaching staff are looking at that play with Randle. But we as fans will not be included in those talks or insight. Hopefully the next time we see some improvements in crunch time. Agree that JB should’ve had the ball in his hands. But JB wasn’t 100% so he gets a pass on that, especially how JB played in OT.

Can’t say enough about this team. Solid game. If we had lost though, there would’ve been a lot of trade Randle threads. Glad we won.

In this situation, what does holding Randle accountable look like? What actions are Thibs taking?

Well blaming the fans for Randles ejection vs what I would expect. Just say what Randle himself said.

That ejection by randle was selfish and randle would agree with that.

Simple statement that puts the ownership on Randle not the team. Don’t get me wrong, Randle needs help from the team. But that’s what I would call thibs holding Randle accountable.

But as I said, it seems like thibs dances a little when talking about Randle. And maybe that’s something I didn’t realize with thibs and his press conferences. That was just my expectations and I was wrong. I’m learning more and more about thibs each day.

blkexec wrote:

martin wrote:

blkexec wrote:

BigRedDog wrote:Thibs said he was happy with Randles shot??? hopefully this is just for public sake and in the future they change how it goes down. The ball should have been in Brunsons hand. One of the ugliest shot sequence I have ever seen.
"Tom Thibodeau didn’t regret the final shot of regulation. In fact, he was happy with the shot despite Julius Randle’s baseline fadeaway failing to hit iron."

This is why I starting saying thibs doesn’t hold Randle accountable. He uses pillow talk and gives a politically correct response with the intention to not throw Randle under the bus. This is an example of my original thought.

Now I’m seeing another side of thibs I didn’t know existed. Of course that was a bad play, but in the same breath it’s a shot he’s made several times. And even when he got those, I still felt like it was a bad shot. But he makes those shots so I can’t argue that.

But thibs is learning to use pillow talk by saying he’s ok with Randles shot. Same when thibs said the team is to blame for Randles ejection. Seems like he’s intentionally showing Randle that he’s wanted, he’s loved and the team needs him. So I’m retiring my comment on holding Randle accountable. I see now thibs is using the media at times to send a message to Randle and the team. Regardless if I agree or not. But I understand now.

I’m sure thibs and coaching staff are looking at that play with Randle. But we as fans will not be included in those talks or insight. Hopefully the next time we see some improvements in crunch time. Agree that JB should’ve had the ball in his hands. But JB wasn’t 100% so he gets a pass on that, especially how JB played in OT.

Can’t say enough about this team. Solid game. If we had lost though, there would’ve been a lot of trade Randle threads. Glad we won.

In this situation, what does holding Randle accountable look like? What actions are Thibs taking?

Well blaming the fans for Randles ejection vs what I would expect. Just say what Randle himself said.

That ejection by randle was selfish and randle would agree with that.

Simple statement that puts the ownership on Randle not the team. Don’t get me wrong, Randle needs help from the team. But that’s what I would call thibs holding Randle accountable.

But as I said, it seems like thibs dances a little when talking about Randle. And maybe that’s something I didn’t realize with thibs and his press conferences. That was just my expectations and I was wrong. I’m learning more and more about thibs each day.

What are you talking about regarding blaming fans for Randle ejection? You just made that up.

So your thought process is that trash talking Randle in a nice way during the press conference is the way to hold Randle accountable? That's the entirety of your take?

You want Thibs to create a divide between himself and the team and individual players? That is what you think Holding Accountable means?

martin wrote:

BigRedDog wrote:Thibs said he was happy with Randles shot??? hopefully this is just for public sake and in the future they change how it goes down. The ball should have been in Brunsons hand. One of the ugliest shot sequence I have ever seen.
"Tom Thibodeau didn’t regret the final shot of regulation. In fact, he was happy with the shot despite Julius Randle’s baseline fadeaway failing to hit iron."

Here is an odd take from a not Randle-lover lol: I thought both the Randle post ups and last regulation shot were OK from a tactical perspective; they were definitely ugly to fail from an execution perspective. Knicks do only have 1 better offensive option in Brunson and he was banged up and every defender the Bulls could through at him was a fairly big guy, and Caruso was guarding him at 6'5" and he is a very good defender, last 3point ice skating routine aside.

You switch, switch and suddenly Randle is at top of key with Caruso on him at an advantage. Chicago NEEDS to double - as they did constantly - and Jules needs to make the right reads. I don't know if he really did that in the last minutes of regulation but he is in his spot.

The last shot? His fav side is cleared out and he got an open look. Fadeaway not the best type of shot you want but he got it.

Randle makes that fadeaway and everyone is a genius.

Last but not least: Coaches and teams NEED to put their best players in these situations. It is a win or tie (or sometimes lose) situation, and if you only go to Brunson EVERY game that is close - and there have been more than 2 games recently where Brunson failed at his last minute shots too - then you are doing a disservice to your team long term.

The team can't NOT give the ball to Brunson, RJ, Randle for those types of possessions, especially when they are doing well offensively, and Randle was. Those guys NEED to be in those situations and fail a lot to be able to get better and then not fail when it really counts - like play-in games or hopefully playoff games.

I understand what you are saying I just think 1) Randle doesn't have the offensive repertoire to be handed the ball 30 feet out and asked to succeed and 2) I don't necessarily want to have Brunson score every time just start with the ball , penetrate , kick out to an open man when other people slack off or take it to the basket if its open. Randle fade a way from that spot is probably a 5-10% success rate ? Having him stand out there with 20 seconds on the clock ticking was just so ugly.

blkexec wrote:

martin wrote:

blkexec wrote:

martin wrote:

blkexec wrote:

BigRedDog wrote:Thibs said he was happy with Randles shot??? hopefully this is just for public sake and in the future they change how it goes down. The ball should have been in Brunsons hand. One of the ugliest shot sequence I have ever seen.
"Tom Thibodeau didn’t regret the final shot of regulation. In fact, he was happy with the shot despite Julius Randle’s baseline fadeaway failing to hit iron."

This is why I starting saying thibs doesn’t hold Randle accountable. He uses pillow talk and gives a politically correct response with the intention to not throw Randle under the bus. This is an example of my original thought.

Now I’m seeing another side of thibs I didn’t know existed. Of course that was a bad play, but in the same breath it’s a shot he’s made several times. And even when he got those, I still felt like it was a bad shot. But he makes those shots so I can’t argue that.

But thibs is learning to use pillow talk by saying he’s ok with Randles shot. Same when thibs said the team is to blame for Randles ejection. Seems like he’s intentionally showing Randle that he’s wanted, he’s loved and the team needs him. So I’m retiring my comment on holding Randle accountable. I see now thibs is using the media at times to send a message to Randle and the team. Regardless if I agree or not. But I understand now.

I’m sure thibs and coaching staff are looking at that play with Randle. But we as fans will not be included in those talks or insight. Hopefully the next time we see some improvements in crunch time. Agree that JB should’ve had the ball in his hands. But JB wasn’t 100% so he gets a pass on that, especially how JB played in OT.

Can’t say enough about this team. Solid game. If we had lost though, there would’ve been a lot of trade Randle threads. Glad we won.

In this situation, what does holding Randle accountable look like? What actions are Thibs taking?

Well blaming the fans team for Randles ejection vs what I would expect. Just say what Randle himself said.

That ejection by randle was selfish and randle would agree with that.

Simple statement that puts the ownership on Randle not the team. Don’t get me wrong, Randle needs help from the team. But that’s what I would call thibs holding Randle accountable.

But as I said, it seems like thibs dances a little when talking about Randle. And maybe that’s something I didn’t realize with thibs and his press conferences. That was just my expectations and I was wrong. I’m learning more and more about thibs each day.

What are you talking about regarding blaming fans for Randle ejection? You just made that up.

So your thought process is that trash talking Randle in a nice way during the press conference is the way to hold Randle accountable? That's the entirety of your take?

You want Thibs to create a divide between himself and the team and individual players? That is what you think Holding Accountable means?

Martin relax please. You really going in I see. It’s a typo sir.

Martin, you said in this example, what are you expecting thibs to do when holding Randle accountable. So I have a specific example.

Then you turn around and say that’s it, that’s what all this accountability stuff is about? How can u ask for a specific example then say I’m using that for every example on accountability? That’s simply not true.

Now since u asked me for an example and I gave you one, can you respond to that example?

This is why chat is very difficult to have a normal convo. Especially if you don’t know me. What the hell fans have to do with it? 🤣 It’s a freaking typo dude

BigRedDog wrote:

martin wrote:

BigRedDog wrote:Thibs said he was happy with Randles shot??? hopefully this is just for public sake and in the future they change how it goes down. The ball should have been in Brunsons hand. One of the ugliest shot sequence I have ever seen.
"Tom Thibodeau didn’t regret the final shot of regulation. In fact, he was happy with the shot despite Julius Randle’s baseline fadeaway failing to hit iron."

Here is an odd take from a not Randle-lover lol: I thought both the Randle post ups and last regulation shot were OK from a tactical perspective; they were definitely ugly to fail from an execution perspective. Knicks do only have 1 better offensive option in Brunson and he was banged up and every defender the Bulls could through at him was a fairly big guy, and Caruso was guarding him at 6'5" and he is a very good defender, last 3point ice skating routine aside.

You switch, switch and suddenly Randle is at top of key with Caruso on him at an advantage. Chicago NEEDS to double - as they did constantly - and Jules needs to make the right reads. I don't know if he really did that in the last minutes of regulation but he is in his spot.

The last shot? His fav side is cleared out and he got an open look. Fadeaway not the best type of shot you want but he got it.

Randle makes that fadeaway and everyone is a genius.

Last but not least: Coaches and teams NEED to put their best players in these situations. It is a win or tie (or sometimes lose) situation, and if you only go to Brunson EVERY game that is close - and there have been more than 2 games recently where Brunson failed at his last minute shots too - then you are doing a disservice to your team long term.

The team can't NOT give the ball to Brunson, RJ, Randle for those types of possessions, especially when they are doing well offensively, and Randle was. Those guys NEED to be in those situations and fail a lot to be able to get better and then not fail when it really counts - like play-in games or hopefully playoff games.

I understand what you are saying I just think 1) Randle doesn't have the offensive repertoire to be handed the ball 30 feet out and asked to succeed and 2) I don't necessarily want to have Brunson score every time just start with the ball , penetrate , kick out to an open man when other people slack off or take it to the basket if its open. Randle fade a way from that spot is probably a 5-10% success rate ? Having him stand out there with 20 seconds on the clock ticking was just so ugly.

You are not wrong with any of this.

The simple answer is that Knicks don't really have a proper or ideal #1 or #2 who you can just give the ball to in late clock or game situations (give or take).

Until then I think we all are understanding that Randle and RJ will get those types of shots, as ugly as they turn out to be and IMHO you still have to give the ball to those guys exactly the way it unfolded, for better or worse or however ugly it turns out to be.

The general metric for late game shots in this type of situation is about a 30% average. That's ugly, and those are your all stars and super stars generally taking those shots, which Randle is not.